is…

1-QB
5-OL
3-TE
2-RB (One being a 300 lb Nose Tackle playing Fullback)

10 guys straight up blocking. Cannot get more push than that set up, which means it is the BEST way to run the ball for short yardage.

Is that usually, in such an obvious running situation, you are removing just as many blockers as defenders. The safeties will not back off on 3rd/4th and short, and just put the defenders on an island against the receivers. This then makes for good passing matchups, but the defense will be bringing so many guys that your QB will have to get rid of the ball before any separation can be made. So, assuming you are running the ball, splitting out receivers does nothing to affect the net defenders/blockers matchup, but actually gives the defenders on the outside of the line (DE’s, OLB’s) a shorter distance between them and the ball carrier. I’m not saying that splitting guys wide is never a good idea (I’ve always believed that execution is way more important than scheme) but doing it without actually integrating a passing game into it is a waste.

you could argue that, for a dive play, a wide out receiver has a 100% block success rate (as he simply removes a defender from the equation), which is probably better than even the best pure blocker. If the defense sets up with big guys, expecting that you’ll run the dive, you could audible to a (play-action) pass play that takes advantage of the favorable WR match-ups. The D would be required to put at least one guy on each receiver that you set out wide. If that favors your dive, you take the dive. If the match-ups favor your receivers, you audible.

It depends on how confident you are with your goal line passing.

I’m going to acknowledge, but not remove a faulty assumption in this philosophy: A pure blocker could actually achieve a higher than 100% blocking success rate, as he might block more than one defender, whether by intent, or by simply taking up space, which certainly happens a lot, especially on the outside.